Bush is getting ready to address the nation

[charrison]

Originally posted by: drewshin
The proof you seek lies in the non-cooperation of Iraq.

1. We still do not have a full disclosure of weapons. This is an inspections process, not an easter egg hunt.
If Saddam was serious you would be seeing the results you want.

2. Lack of scientist interviews. These have not happened.

3. No documents showing destructions of weapons. No documents or peopel seem to know what happened to them. IF they were destroyed, someone would know.

4. Obvious movement of material before sites have been inspected.

Iraq is not cooperating. What do you think they have to hide?

iraq is cooperating, but perhaps not up to the speed that the u.s. would like. i think we should expect that though, what if the fbi came to search your house looking for drugs and you knew that you didn't have any (just an example, i think iraq might have wmds). would you just voluntarily give information to them? iraq is cooperating very slowly, but they want to do it on their terms.


anyway, as i said before, i am pretty sure that iraq is hiding something, but my gripe is that the u.s. will not divulge that information because they want a war. as i said before, this whole wmd thing seems like it's a distraction to me, i think the u.s. could care less what they have, they just want to know where they are so that they can avoid them during the war...they just want the oil.[/quote]

1. The oil belongs to iraq, that is has been stated.

2. venezuala, canada,alaska(we only need to convince tree huggers to let us drill), and saudi have plent of oil
and would be far easier to invade for oil.

3.Iraq is not cooperating at all. If they were, the inspectors would have the evidence they need and the threat of war would be gone. If iraq cooperates, there is no need for war. The only reason inspectors are there, is the threat of war.

Your head is stuck firmly in the sand. There is no evidence that could be produced that would make you happy and you are you quite happy to support saddam as innocent.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Dudd

Originally posted by: charrison
NK army is not modern either.....

Didn't bother to read it, but a couple million man army will give just about any invading army trouble, in spite of the technology difference. We'd still kill them, but the US public is not ready for another Vietnam.

Edit: After reading, change that to a 996,000 man army.

North Korea is not modern by U.S. standards but they have enough artillery along their border to flatten Seoul. They wouldn't even need a nuclear weapon.

Hopefully we got plenty of warthogs ready to go there.

 

[drewshin]

This is NOT a scavenger hunt for the inspectors. It is NOT their job to find the hidden weapons. It is Saddam's job to lead them directly to the weapons.

Iraq doesn't get to do it on their terms, the punishment for not complying according to OUR terms this time means war.

Hopper

it wouldnt be a scavenger hunt for inspectors if the u.s. would tell them where they are. but of course, they wont because of their itchy fingers, just aching for a war.

like i said before, this whole inspections, weapons of mass destruction, has very little to do with what's going on here.
i guess we'll have to wait twenty years to find out what their real intentions are, as we have for every other war in the previous century.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: drewshin

This is NOT a scavenger hunt for the inspectors. It is NOT their job to find the hidden weapons. It is Saddam's job to lead them directly to the weapons.

Iraq doesn't get to do it on their terms, the punishment for not complying according to OUR terms this time means war.

Hopper

it wouldnt be a scavenger hunt for inspectors if the u.s. would tell them where they are. but of course, they wont because of their itchy fingers, just aching for a war.

like i said before, this whole inspections, weapons of mass destruction, has very little to do with what's going on here.
i guess we'll have to wait twenty years to find out what their real intentions are, as we have for every other war in the previous century.

And why should we tell the inspectors where stuff is, if they can move it before the inspectors get there.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: drewshin

This is NOT a scavenger hunt for the inspectors. It is NOT their job to find the hidden weapons. It is Saddam's job to lead them directly to the weapons.

Iraq doesn't get to do it on their terms, the punishment for not complying according to OUR terms this time means war.

Hopper

it wouldnt be a scavenger hunt for inspectors if the u.s. would tell them where they are. but of course, they wont because of their itchy fingers, just aching for a war.

like i said before, this whole inspections, weapons of mass destruction, has very little to do with what's going on here.
i guess we'll have to wait twenty years to find out what their real intentions are, as we have for every other war in the previous century.

And why should we tell the inspectors where stuff is, if they can move it before the inspectors get there.

Yes, it is better to just say it was there months later on...

 

[drewshin]

1. The oil belongs to iraq, that is has been stated.
i'm sure the u.s. will get a healthy discount on it to recoup their war costs, as they did to kuwait and other countries for the gulf war.

2. venezuala, canada,alaska(we only need to convince tree huggers to let us drill), and saudi have plent of oil
and would be far easier to invade for oil.
venezuela not producing right now, saudi has plenty of oil but is restricted by opec.

3.Iraq is not cooperating at all. If they were, the inspectors would have the evidence they need and the threat of war would be gone. If iraq cooperates, there is no need for war. The only reason inspectors are there, is the threat of war.


Your head is stuck firmly in the sand. There is no evidence that could be produced that would make you happy and you are you quite happy to support saddam as innocent.[/quote]

you've obviously not been reading what im writing, i dont think i ever said saddam is innocent. im saying the u.s. is guilty of doing anything they can to get this war started, even if it means that they have to hide the evidence of iraq's wmds until after they have fought their war. this has been my point the whole time. your head is firmly stuck with thinking im saying iraq is innocent or does not have wmd for some reason.

 

[Judgement]

Originally posted by: Electrode

Originally posted by: Judgement
maybe the fact that he has harboring terrorists,

Nope.

hates everyone in the freeworld,

Maybe.

and is actively seeking WMD to use on us.

No.

Just a few ideas... I guess if he had WMD to use on us it wouldn't be that big of a threat

Huh?

I forgot, you are the expert on Iraq's intensions, you know why they aren't cooperating with inspectors and following the rules layed out by the UN 12 years ago... and you know that their intensions are good.

You know undoubtedly that all the Iraq/Al Qaeda links are false, and that we have no reason to fear alliances being formed by our mutual allies. They are making weapons so they can sit there and stare at them in awe. Its there to entertain them since they don't have cable

You're a genius, all knowning and omnipresent. You should be our leader, so we could avoid all conflict and the world would come to peace because the US decided to stop protecting its interests.

Then you woke up, and an Iraqi supplied terrorist detonated a WMD in a major US city, thousands of innocent people are dead, and we end up going to war regardless. All this because we skipped the middle step. We played dumb, ignored the blatant forming problems, and sat back thinking all our problems will solve themselves. We can either go to Iraq now and stop them, or wait until our people die and then go to war and stop them.

Any sane person would choose the first option.

 

[drewshin]

youre "sane" option is not so sane. what happens when saddam is kicked out? do you think everybody that has these biological/chemical agents is going to say "yay, saddam is gone" let's give these to the u.s.! no, they're going to all go on the black market to the highest bidder.

everybody's so worried about a terrorist detonating a biological/chemical agent, but why has it NEVER been done before by a terrorist. even in israel, where terrorists seem to slip through every week, why has there been no use of biological agents? it would affect hundreds of times as many people and instill so much more fear.

i think there is much more of a chance of a rogue U.S. person stealing some from one of our labs than iraq ever using theirs on us.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: drewshin
1. The oil belongs to iraq, that is has been stated.
i'm sure the u.s. will get a healthy discount on it to recoup their war costs, as they did to kuwait and other countries for the gulf war.

2. venezuala, canada,alaska(we only need to convince tree huggers to let us drill), and saudi have plent of oil
and would be far easier to invade for oil.
venezuela not producing right now, saudi has plenty of oil but is restricted by opec.

3.Iraq is not cooperating at all. If they were, the inspectors would have the evidence they need and the threat of war would be gone. If iraq cooperates, there is no need for war. The only reason inspectors are there, is the threat of war.


Your head is stuck firmly in the sand. There is no evidence that could be produced that would make you happy and you are you quite happy to support saddam as innocent.

you've obviously not been reading what im writing, i dont think i ever said saddam is innocent. im saying the u.s. is guilty of doing anything they can to get this war started, even if it means that they have to hide the evidence of iraq's wmds until after they have fought their war. this has been my point the whole time. your head is firmly stuck with thinking im saying iraq is innocent or does not have wmd for some reason.[/quote]

Lets do this logically.

1. The US knows were the stuff is stashed.
2. The US needs to know where stuff is in case there is an invasion.
3. Saddam knows where stuff is.
4. The inspectors are on an easter egg hunt.
5. The US tells the inspectors where to look(1), stuff gets moved.
6. Saddam has infiltrated the inspectors communications(5)
7. The US stops telling inspectors where to find stuff(6)


Simple.


The evidence you want is going to require more than inspectors.

 

[Judgement]

Originally posted by: drewshin
youre "sane" option is not so sane. what happens when saddam is kicked out? do you think everybody that has these biological/chemical agents is going to say "yay, saddam is gone" let's give these to the u.s.! no, they're going to all go on the black market to the highest bidder.

everybody's so worried about a terrorist detonating a biological/chemical agent, but why has it NEVER been done before by a terrorist. even in israel, where terrorists seem to slip through every week, why has there been no use of biological agents? it would affect hundreds of times as many people and instill so much more fear.

i think there is much more of a chance of a rogue U.S. person stealing some from one of our labs than iraq ever using theirs on us.

We would invade but just leave the stuff laying around for other people to take you think?

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: charrison
The evidence you want is going to require more than inspectors.

Well put...

Hopper

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: drewshin
youre "sane" option is not so sane. what happens when saddam is kicked out? do you think everybody that has these biological/chemical agents is going to say "yay, saddam is gone" let's give these to the u.s.! no, they're going to all go on the black market to the highest bidder.

everybody's so worried about a terrorist detonating a biological/chemical agent, but why has it NEVER been done before by a terrorist. even in israel, where terrorists seem to slip through every week, why has there been no use of biological agents? it would affect hundreds of times as many people and instill so much more fear.

i think there is much more of a chance of a rogue U.S. person stealing some from one of our labs than iraq ever using theirs on us.

There are a few things to consider about WMD. First of all, with a biological attack, there are many palestinians in israel, and you'd have quite a bit of collateral damage. Ditto for a nuclear weapon. If you use chemical weapons, well, for some reason Jewish people have this thing about being gassed to death... of the three options, this one might piss off Israel's citizens/government the most and spur them to a reaction with a wider scope. Every nation that has publicly acknowledged having WMDs, has, to the best of my knowledge, made it policy that if they are attacked with a WMD, they will respond in kind. While Israel has never publicly confirmed that they have nukes, every intelligence agency who does the research and makes a list of which countries have nukes puts Israel's inventory at over 50. If Israel ever got hit with a WMD, they are going to be pissed. Pissed to the point where their inventory could easily go down by 10+ weapons and leave them with less worries about border security because whoever next wants to invade is going to have to get through the radiation first.. Anyone who considers hitting Israel with a WMD has to consider their retaliation. To make sure that no one ever tries for a repeat, Israel would be looking to make a statement, IMO.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: drewshin
1. The oil belongs to iraq, that is has been stated.
i'm sure the u.s. will get a healthy discount on it to recoup their war costs, as they did to kuwait and other countries for the gulf war.

2. venezuala, canada,alaska(we only need to convince tree huggers to let us drill), and saudi have plent of oil
and would be far easier to invade for oil.
venezuela not producing right now, saudi has plenty of oil but is restricted by opec.

3.Iraq is not cooperating at all. If they were, the inspectors would have the evidence they need and the threat of war would be gone. If iraq cooperates, there is no need for war. The only reason inspectors are there, is the threat of war.


Your head is stuck firmly in the sand. There is no evidence that could be produced that would make you happy and you are you quite happy to support saddam as innocent.

you've obviously not been reading what im writing, i dont think i ever said saddam is innocent. im saying the u.s. is guilty of doing anything they can to get this war started, even if it means that they have to hide the evidence of iraq's wmds until after they have fought their war. this has been my point the whole time. your head is firmly stuck with thinking im saying iraq is innocent or does not have wmd for some reason.

Lets do this logically.

1. The US knows were the stuff is stashed.
2. The US needs to know where stuff is in case there is an invasion.
3. Saddam knows where stuff is.
4. The inspectors are on an easter egg hunt.
5. The US tells the inspectors where to look(1), stuff gets moved.
6. Saddam has infiltrated the inspectors communications(5)
7. The US stops telling inspectors where to find stuff(6)


Simple.


The evidence you want is going to require more than inspectors.[/quote]

Its already a foregone conclusion by the United States that he has WMD. That, imo, isn't justification for war, or else they'd be going after the many other nations that have WMD, including on one end, NK, and at the other, Israel. Nor is the fact that Saddam is a SOB who kills his own people (there have been plenty of dictators who've done that). This war ultimately is about making Israel feel "secure" and is yet another step by the US to accomplish this. I expect major blowback. At least we have more places to "hid" then you do.